Designs reportedly in the works for Apple-created TV, but in “early stages”

There's still no guarantee an Apple-branded TV will ever see the light of day.

On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal dumped more fuel on the TV fire by claiming Apple is currently testing multiple designs for TV sets with its Asian suppliers. Though Apple has also reportedly been in talks with cable TV operators to deliver live TV on demand to a set-top box (or an Apple-created TV), one source dutifully pointed out that the TV prototypes are not "a formal project yet. It is still in the early stages of testing."

It's worth noting, just as the WSJ points out, that Apple often tests designs with its Asian partners without committing to manufacturing, though the company usually spends years doing its own internal designs before involving outside suppliers. In this case, it sounds as if Apple has at least gotten that far—two sources claim Hon Hai is the supplier that's working with Sharp to design the new TV—though there's no guarantee that it (or other designs) will ever see the light of day.

Buzz about an Apple-branded TV set has been around for years, but seemed to pick up drastically after biographer Walter Isaacson wrote that Apple cofounder Steve Jobs declared he'd "finally cracked" the secret to making a TV as simple as the iPhone. Since then, it seems as if Apple has stopped trying to deny its interest in expanding its living room presence, but still won't comment on any experiments or plans. Current Apple CEO Tim Cook recently made headlines on this topic again by telling NBC's Brian Williams that Apple has an "intense interest" in the television market, but that's likely to be all we'll hear from him about it until the mythical device makes its debut.

Walter Isaacson wrote that Apple cofounder Steve Jobs declared he'd "finally cracked" the secret to making a TV as simple as the iPhone.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

Some people really don't understand elektronic devices, find the manuals too complicated and don't dare try out anything they don't know for fear of breaking the device. If Apple can make a TV that my parents can set to their liking then they have achieved something miraculous.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

Have ya *seen* the remote controls of your common TVs? Alan Turing couldn't figure them out. That and the Big Content side of things have probably laid-low many a smart-TV prototype.

Yes. On/off, channel up/down, volume up/down, and number pad is so hard to use. No one understand those at all. I'm sure however apple will make this all easier by requiring you to screw around with onscreen controls

TVs are simple. Getting multiple components to talk to each other is the harder part. Is Apple going to do the work to coordinate DVD/BD, receivers, surround, cable set top boxes and game consoles in a way that you never need to leave their 10 foot interface? If not, it's just a vanity or style item, and not a real solution for people.

I currently get by with a tiny HTPC running Windows 7 Media Center, Media Browser, TotalMedia Theater and an HDHomerun Prime. I set up a touch screen remote for it with macros that turns everything on, switches inputs and starts the operation I want to do with one button, including the receiver.

If Apple won't do the legwork to replace that, it won't do anything for most people, who still need to juggle multiple remotes.

I think it's interesting that recently, the CEO of Time Warner stated that he hoped Apple was working on something to shake up the Tv industry. That's a big statement from the CEO of one of the biggest cable networks.

It's doubtful that Asian companies are designing anything for Apple's Tv, other than the screen from Sharp, which hopefully is an IZGO version which Apple supposedly wants for all their future devices, and some of the circuitry that Apple hasn't done much work with in the past. This would fit in with the statements from a couple of people in the industry that said Apple had given $2 billion to Sharp for plant and equipment to build screens for them, as Apple often does with suppliers ($7.9 billion last year, scheduled to rise to at least $10 billion in 2013).

I hope they don't go crazy on the video and audio source input side of things. I feel like they may be inclined to drop a lot of legacy connectors on the back that they think people never use or shouldn't use any more. That could keep a lot of people from buying in.

Walter Isaacson wrote that Apple cofounder Steve Jobs declared he'd "finally cracked" the secret to making a TV as simple as the iPhone.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

I wish that's were the complexity was. It's presenting a unified, coherent interface to the consumer, that tames the content jungle (legal, economic, and technological) that's the current landscape which is the obstacle.

TVs are simple. Getting multiple components to talk to each other is the harder part. Is Apple going to do the work to coordinate DVD/BD, receivers, surround, cable set top boxes and game consoles in a way that you never need to leave their 10 foot interface? If not, it's just a vanity or style item, and not a real solution for people.

I currently get by with a tiny HTPC running Windows 7 Media Center, Media Browser, TotalMedia Theater and an HDHomerun Prime. I set up a touch screen remote for it with macros that turns everything on, switches inputs and starts the operation I want to do with one button, including the receiver.

If Apple won't do the legwork to replace that, it won't do anything for most people, who still need to juggle multiple remotes.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

Have ya *seen* the remote controls of your common TVs? Alan Turing couldn't figure them out. That and the Big Content side of things have probably laid-low many a smart-TV prototype.

Yes. On/off, channel up/down, volume up/down, and number pad is so hard to use. No one understand those at all. I'm sure however apple will make this all easier by requiring you to screw around with onscreen controls

For some just that is hard enough to deal with. It's not a "are you smarter than a fifth-grader" issue. Someone with disabilities, or infirmities could have some difficulty dealing with which is up, and which is down. What is channel and what is volume. Poor vision, poor hearing, poor motor control.

I hope they don't go crazy on the video and audio source input side of things. I feel like they may be inclined to drop a lot of legacy connectors on the back that they think people never use or shouldn't use any more. That could keep a lot of people from buying in.

They are called legacy connectors because most people aren't using them any more. Recently, my daughter asked me to buy her a new Tv for her room. She didn't tell me she wanted it for her Wii, mostly. I ended up getting her a 27" monitor instead, as she really didn't want a Tv tuner to replace the one in the old model that died.

But, it didn't have component inputs, as the Wii needs, so she was frustrated. We sent away for a converter, which just came in. We'll try that. I told her that finding anything with component inputs these days was a problem, and it is. Long gone are the days when my high end graphics monitors were run through a four connector component cable.

Nowadays, most inputs and outputs are HDMI and Mini DisplayPort, and the quickly becoming less common DVI, DVI-D and VGA.

How many people really want legacy inputs such as composite, S-video and component? People who still use those have old equipment, and are less likely to upgrade to something more sophisticated anyway. They are a diminishing minority.

This is a GOOD thing.

A recent survey said that 43% of people surveyed were interested in an Apple TV, and were willing to pay a 20% premium for it. Another report said that Apple could sell as many as 13 million Tv's in the first year.

I just want something that's good looking, integrates with all my Apple products and gets rid of multiple remotes. I don't care if I have to pay a premium, get rid of bullshit legacy ports or if the product is considered elitist.

Oh, and when they put AppleTV internals back there, put my time capsule internals there too. I like fewer cords and fewer electronics.

As an Apple fan and investor, I am against the idea that they ever make actual TVs. I get enough grief carrying around Apple gear and looking like a fanboi (protip, start a successful company and you can buy all the Apple stuff you want "free"). I am NOT going to invite friends over and have them see an Apple logo in my living room.

Apple has no intention to work with other methods of content provision. They do not support TV tuning nor BD on Apple TV, nor on their compuetrs. They would also not work with Sony and MS to help work with their consoles.

TVs are simple. Getting multiple components to talk to each other is the harder part. Is Apple going to do the work to coordinate DVD/BD, receivers, surround, cable set top boxes and game consoles in a way that you never need to leave their 10 foot interface? If not, it's just a vanity or style item, and not a real solution for people.

I currently get by with a tiny HTPC running Windows 7 Media Center, Media Browser, TotalMedia Theater and an HDHomerun Prime. I set up a touch screen remote for it with macros that turns everything on, switches inputs and starts the operation I want to do with one button, including the receiver.

If Apple won't do the legwork to replace that, it won't do anything for most people, who still need to juggle multiple remotes.

Exactly. I have less than zero personal interest in doing what you've done to get the setup you have. And I have a lot more know how than the average Joe Blogs. Most people, myself included, are going to want to buy a single item off the shelf that does it all without having to cock around much. I mean hell, my old tv has a remote almost as long as my forearm and it's not a smart tv! If Apple can successfully stuff all those functions in and make it work with a good interface and cut down cables and complexity of remotes, it has a chance of being a success. Adding content deals will also add value to such a proposition.

I still have my doubts as to whether this will wander out of 'side hobby' and into actual product for Apple. We'll just have to wait and see.

How many people really want legacy inputs such as composite, S-video and component? People who still use those have old equipment, and are less likely to upgrade to something more sophisticated anyway. They are a diminishing minority.

It's not an either/or especially as it pertains to TV. For example a Roku will have some legacy support as well as HDMI. Those who chose to not upgrade aren't penalized, and those who want the future can have it. Roku wins both ways especially for a mass market device.

I am almost certain that the hardware and software would be better than what's out there. What would be the point of manufacturing just another television? However, the closed garden issue might crop up here. People content to be in the garden will embrace this, and other won't. However if the CEO of Time Warner thinks that this is beneficial, then we can assume that they have figured out a way of charging consumers even more for the same content.

Even though I'm a fan of Apple products and own several, I'm always a bit skeptical when they venture into new territory. A phone? C'mon. This tablet is just a giant iPhone! Oh, I see. Suffice to say, I usually feel that I'm wrong. And while I'm still skeptical that TV's are the way to go, I feel that if Apple is willing to invest itself into a new product, it's usually because they feel they have something different to offer.

Amazing screen with optimal contrast? Apple TV incorporated, maybe even iOS itself? Perfect compatibility with other iOS devices as controllers (I know Apple TV allows this). There's seems like enough opportunity for them to reach into the market now that they've penetrated so much into households with iOS devices. Hell, an iOS capable TV could finally expand Apple's venture from mobile gaming market into the console gaming market, at least, however console gaming-like it is to play iOS games on your TV. With Vice City and Baldur's Gate out just this week, that's not a terrible thing.

Here in the Netherlands the XBox just got an app made by the cable company, so users don't need to use the cable company's mediabox. This is really what is needed to finally get everything in one box, one system. Add smart glass, voice and kinect for remote control and modern tv starts to get simple again.

I can see Apple Tv going the same way. It's al about making the right deals with the cable companies. I wouldn't mind an Xbox Tv as well.

Walter Isaacson wrote that Apple cofounder Steve Jobs declared he'd "finally cracked" the secret to making a TV as simple as the iPhone.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

Some people really don't understand elektronic devices, find the manuals too complicated and don't dare try out anything they don't know for fear of breaking the device. If Apple can make a TV that my parents can set to their liking then they have achieved something miraculous.

Honestly I'm among the people that can't use a TV. My RCN remote and interface are truly horrific. My eyes hurt looking at either one of them. I hand the remote to my girlfriend and say "make it go".

In short, there is a huge amount of room for Apple to improve this market, and for my sake, I hope they do.

(Some people will see that a triumph of a specification checklist. I see it as a failure of design.)

Mark me down as one of the former. I'm sick and tired of people trying to simplify things to the point where they're useless crap, Apple style. No thanks. For me all Apple products are a perfect example of why sacrificing flexibility for simplicity fails.

(Some people will see that a triumph of a specification checklist. I see it as a failure of design.)

Mark me down as one of the former. I'm sick and tired of people trying to simplify things to the point where they're useless crap, Apple style. No thanks. For me all Apple products are a perfect example of why sacrificing flexibility for simplicity fails.

Apple will go for less rather than more I would stake money on the lack of any scart or component components, if anything you'll be able to buy adapters. You might get a HDMI but more likely just a thunderbolt connector and some wireless ability, so it can be hooked up to a Mac or iPad.

TVs are simple. Getting multiple components to talk to each other is the harder part. Is Apple going to do the work to coordinate DVD/BD, receivers, surround, cable set top boxes and game consoles in a way that you never need to leave their 10 foot interface? If not, it's just a vanity or style item, and not a real solution for people.

That already exists... it is called a logitech harmony remote and it can save a marriage.

Walter Isaacson wrote that Apple cofounder Steve Jobs declared he'd "finally cracked" the secret to making a TV as simple as the iPhone.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

Could be "PR fluff", however we will not know until Apple actually ships a product and that product line is tracked over time. As Steve Jobs said during the development of the original Mac when they were having many problems "Real Artists Ship"!

Personally I think that the real magic is in the licensing deals for the content. Much as the original iTunes Music Store innovated in the licensing deals that Steve was able to cut with the major labels, so too must the Apple TV. Does Apple still have the negotiating clout they had when Steve was alive? It is hard to tell.

It is too bad that the uniform $0.99 pricing for a song that Steve pushed was eroded over DRM. Personally I think that Steve was right to have uniform pricing, although I thought it should be at $0.69 per song, in that customers always knew what to expect and the price was low enough to sway a significant percentage of users away from Kazaa, Limewire, etc.

Any Apple TV that ships, if it does not have content, will not do well. If Apple can crack the licensing that allows a true ala carte TV experience with super easy search for content and pay as you go or bundles for show seasons, can deliver the Quality of Service (QoS) of the cable operators and can undercut cable or FIOS pricing then they may be able to be a market disruptor - again. One of the keys will be licensing (or distribution from other licensess) of Sports content. It will be interesting to see what Apple, Inc. can deliver, if they ship anything at all.

Finally it seems that Samsung is pretty far along with a Smart TV of there own and they must have patented it up the wazoo. The patent wars will most likely shift from Smart Phones to Smart TVs should Apple ship a Smart TV. This is going to be interesting...

[quote="melgrossA recent survey said that 43% of people surveyed were interested in an Apple TV, and were willing to pay a 20% premium for it. Another report said that Apple could sell as many as 13 million Tv's in the first year.[/quote]

I get enough grief carrying around Apple gear and looking like a fanboi (protip, start a successful company and you can buy all the Apple stuff you want "free"). I am NOT going to invite friends over and have them see an Apple logo in my living room.

I would have that Apple logo in my living room just to piss people off and cause a controversary!

Who cares what others think, use what works for you to accomplish what you want to accomplish - be it iOS, Android, OS X Windows, Linux, whatever. OMG my Sony TV has parts of Linux in it!!!

Walter Isaacson wrote that Apple cofounder Steve Jobs declared he'd "finally cracked" the secret to making a TV as simple as the iPhone.

Really? And just how complicated is the common TV? This sounds like PR fluff.

Some people really don't understand elektronic devices, find the manuals too complicated and don't dare try out anything they don't know for fear of breaking the device. If Apple can make a TV that my parents can set to their liking then they have achieved something miraculous.

The set-top model is the better route. A few HDMI ins, one HDMI out, connect to TV directly, audio ouput from TV to stereo or ATV to stereo. Averything goes through the ATV, and it has all the power, so any generic dumb 1080p capable TV simply works. No manuals to read other than plugging it in using the most simple and basic mode for configuration. a $200 set top that adds everything ATV does today, plus additional smartTV functions, takes control of your cable guide, and directly controls your other set tops and setreo. That's what people want, then they ca have their full suite of features portable between brands and have identical experiences on multipe TVs in the house.

TVs are bought for 10+ years, tech moves too fast to integrate the brain. If Apple is building it;s own branded TV set, I can only imagine it was a modular interface for the ATV components, and is otherwise just a top-end well designed TV that will come with only a slight premium (ATV included), or even be cheaper than full-on smart TVs.

I always took Job's comments to be regarding the TV content supply side of things rather than the actual hardware television itself. The companies that supply our high end TVs at the moment have highly specialised knowledge and expertise on building this technology and I struggle to see what Apple can add to the conversation from an image quality perspective. They could probably reskin a TV from one of their Asian partners with Apple branding, fine tune the smart TV features and sell it for a f**kload but that's hardly the revolutionary Apple we know.